Elanus-Per-Solen Bey v. Drake-Scruggs Equipment Inc, No. 3:2022cv03021 - Document 6 (C.D. Ill. 2022)
Court Description: MERIT REVIEW OPINION: See Written Opinion. This case is Dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. The Clerk will terminate any pending motions and enter Judgment. Entered by Senior District Judge Richard Mills on 4/20/2022. (ME)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Elanus-Per-Solen Bey v. Drake-Scruggs Equipment Inc Doc. 6 3:22-cv-03021-RM-KLM # 6 Page 1 of 2 E-FILED Thursday, 21 April, 2022 12:20:38 PM Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS SPRINGFIELD DIVISION ELANUS-PER-SOLEN BEY ex rel. Brian A. Burnside, Plaintiff, v. DRAKE-SCRUGGS EQUIPMENT, Inc., Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 22-3021 MERIT REVIEW OPINION RICHARD MILLS, United States District Judge: The Plaintiff filed a Pro Se Complaint on February 9, 2022. Pending is Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Section 1915(e)(2) requires the Court to dismiss the case if, inter alia, the complaint fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) In reviewing the complaint, the Court accepts the factual allegations as true, liberally construing them in the plaintiff’s favor. See Turley v. Rednour, 729 F.3d 645, 649 (7th Cir. 2013). However, conclusory statements and labels are insufficient. “[A] complaint must contain facts that are sufficient, when accepted as Dockets.Justia.com 3:22-cv-03021-RM-KLM # 6 Page 2 of 2 true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Alexander v. United States, 721 F.3d 418, 422 (7th Cir. 2013) (quoted citation omitted). Upon reviewing the Complaint, the Court concludes that it lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter. Based on the allegations of the Complaint, it is apparent that Plaintiff is an Illinois citizen suing another Illinois citizen for negligence. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, a negligence lawsuit between two citizens of the same state cannot be maintained in a United States District Court. Even upon accepting the allegations of the complaint as true, the Court must conclude that Plaintiff has not stated a cognizable federal claim. Accordingly, the Court will dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim. Ergo, this case is Dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. The Clerk will terminate any pending motions and enter Judgment. ENTER: April 20, 2022 FOR THE COURT: /s/ Richard Mills Richard Mills United States District Judge
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
